Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:12, 4 January 2008

	Schools Project‑class
This page is related to WikiProject Schools, a collaborative effort to write quality articles about schools around the world. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.SchoolsWikipedia:WikiProject SchoolsTemplate:WikiProject Schoolsschool Project This page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Schools/Archives

• WT:SCH

Afd

Hi, A school related article is up for deletion Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Osceola County School For The Arts. May be the project members would want to comment on it. Thanks -- ¿Amar៛ 05:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

There's another one at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Cincinnati Christian Schools. Are secondary schools considered inherently notable? If not, is there no stated guideline for what would make them notable? --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 02:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Work is in progress - see the thread above. Schools are not inherently notable. They have to satisfy WP:N. Dahliarose 13:48, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

That is arguable. Better to have said many do not believe they are inherently notable. However, every good article should have reliable, secondary sources anyway. DoubleBlue (Talk) 17:10, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I suggested keeping it as it appears to be a notable school, and a few improvements have been made. I do generally believe school articles should pass WP:N, but potential should be looked at too. Camaron1 | Chris 17:42, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Katherine L. Albiani Middle School is in progress; can anyone help me improve the article? I think the school satisfied WP:N. JERRY _contribs 01:45, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Hopkins School

Hopkins School has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Loopla 06:09, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

It failed the review and has been demoted from FA. The details are at Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/Hopkins School/archive1. I briefly attempted to address the lack of references, but Hopkins is nearly invisible on the net, other than the its own web site. I think the article could be brought forward as an FA Candidate again, but someone with access to reference material would have to work on it first. After that, cleaning up the prose and addressing the other editorial problems would be a task any of us could attack. RossPatterson (talk) 02:24, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Feeder lists

I've seen previous questions re the inclusion of long lists of feeder schools and it seemed the general opinion was to remove them. There is some disagreement on this at Bellaire High School (Bellaire, Texas). What do people think? Arthur (talk) 08:23, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not terribly fond of them, but I haven't removed any yet. I changed L. D. Bell High School (Hurst, Texas) and another HS article's feeder schools from a section with a list to prose in the "Student Body" section (diff), which seems to work much better. --Hebisddave (talk) 15:10, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I do not mind if they are prose. As long as the feeder list is there, it is fine :) WhisperToMe (talk) 19:36, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Detecting puffery

I have just rescued another high school articles bad enough to have been nominated for speedy deletion as G11, advertising, using my guideline for Reliable signs of public-relations talk:
1. repeating the school name as often as possible
2. Always using full names of Each School Student Organisation, sometimes along with its (TLA) three letter abbreviation
3. discussion of the ethical values of the place--unsurprisingly, exactly the same as all other schools run by the sponsor.
4. mention of individual recent graduates with success in undergraduate colleges
5. brief tributes to honored current faculty
6. excessive use of the words "individual" and "opportunity"
7. that old standby, adjectives of praise
DGG (talk) 00:21, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. When I see things like that for schools, or indeed for any organisation, I usually head straight for the organisation's website, and 9 times out of ten, I discover to my surprise ;-) that it would fall to be speedied per G12!. Ohconfucius (talk) 04:08, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I strongly agree, but at first glance it seems like #2 would be correct in Misplaced Pages. Is it that PR-speak is indicated because they list every organization? --Hebisddave (talk) 18:34, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Notability (schools)

Just to let you know there has been a new page set-up for reaching consensus on a school inclusion guideline. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 10:45, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Unity High School (Sudan)

This school article is currently a centre of attention as it documents a current event of the main page. I would suggest this project keeps an eye on it, I am going to assess it now, there seems to be a plan to re-direct the page. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 12:03, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I know folks over there are worrying about the controversy overshadowing the school, but this may be the best thing that ever happens to that article. Editting is like an avalanche - the more there is, the more that comes along. Stuyvesant High School reached FA in June 2006, but until November 2003 it was only just a stub - not even its involvment in the September 11, 2001 attacks was able to get it improved. But A1111 and Abulanov started working on it after that, and both the article and the editor pool ballooned after that. Since reaching FA it has settled down, modulo the usual vandalism and student puffery, but that's also to be expected. RossPatterson 15:55, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

8 FCPS Middle Schools up on AfD

Headsup: 8 FCPS middle schools are up for AfD here, including Rachel Carson Middle School that has previously survived AfD. Any input would be appreciated. Zidel333 (talk) 23:54, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

My daughter attended Rachel Carson, so I'm sympathetic, but these articles don't contribute anything to Misplaced Pages. If you want to save them, they need to be beefed up, including some evidence that the schools are notable in some way. RossPatterson (talk) 00:59, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Washington Middle School (Seattle, Washington)

I recently had occasion to look at the article Washington Middle School (Seattle, Washington), because I was doing some work on Seattle Public Schools and found some good material on the history of the school. I added my material, but the bulk of the article is poorly formatted, uncited (and often uncitable) sub-trivia. I don't tend to work on articles on middle schools, so I have no idea what is "normal" for these, but this article is clearly problematic. Could someone from this project, who has more idea of what is normal for this subject matter area please take a look and fix it (maybe with an axe)? Thanks. - Jmabel | Talk 06:43, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

• I did some: moved music stuff from lead to its own section and formatted from ??? into a list, removed names of minors, moved reflist to references section. It's not done and who knows if it would survive AfD, but it's a little more sensible, I guess. --Hebisddave (talk) 16:27, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Requests?

Does this WikiProject do review requests? _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN} 20:29, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

This project does not as of yet have its own peer review request system - though I think it ought to have as many big WikiProjects such as WikiProject Video games do, and it has been suggested before. However, you can currently request an article assessment at WP:SCH/A. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 22:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Hong Kong schools

A whole bunch of HK elementary schools have been prodded. I have pulled the prod on Quarry Bay School, that has an interesting history that looks potentially notable. I am mentioning this here in case any editor has an interest. TerriersFan (talk) 23:43, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Bicester Community College

The Bicester Community College article keeps getting reverted by user 213.105.192.81 (talk), which appears to be the College's own IP address. Someone claiming to represent the College has posted a comment, directed to me, on their talk page, which states "Any article published about Bicester Community College has to be agreed with the Headteacher first". I have pointed out that this is not necessary, but could do with some more eloquent support. I have reverted the article twice today, so I have left their last revert in place and don't plan to make any further changes just yet. ~ Scribble Monkey (talk) 14:02, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Proposal

Is is it possible that school districts in Texas can be categorized by county? --Java7837 (talk) 01:15, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Maybe? They can be, but school district borders sometimes cross county borders, so at least some school districts would be listed under multiple counties. List of school districts in Texas exists and is nice. Tarrant_County,_Texas#Education lists the school districts in that county, and those school district's articles should all link to the Tarrant County article already - that system may be preferable to creating a new template or list page. Texas_Education_Agency#Organization was recently added, and lists counties divided by TEA regions - those regions may also be a useful division. (Just wanted to provide a few links I was aware of.) I think it's an interesting idea - is there any particular reason or problem you're aiming to solve? --Hebisddave (talk) 16:22, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (U.S. schools)

I have now closed the straw poll and have tried to make changes to address concerns raised. Any feedback on the talk page would be appreciated. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 14:57, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Baton Rouge Magnet High School

The Baton Rouge Magnet High School article continues to have problems with WP:OR and WP:UNDUE as relates to the photo gallery. This has been discussed without success on the talk page as well as at Misplaced Pages:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Photographic_evidence and to the current editor that is reverting the changes User talk:68.13.73.193. Having another set of eyeballs would probably help on this article. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 23:01, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I will take a look as it as it could do with a re-assessment. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 13:50, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Articles in need of emergency, short term attention

How and when does the "Articles in need of emergency, short term attention" section get trimmed? Should I just do it? AliveFreeHappy (talk) 21:53, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, generally somebody just trims it when they think it has gotten to long. The list length is alright currently, but will need trimming when it gets any longer. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 22:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking of age as well, it seems like at some point "short term" is not short anymore. ;-) AliveFreeHappy (talk) 00:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

ROTC Staff lists

We've got a series of anonymous IP's adding ROTC info to a lot of schools. Unfortunately in many cases they're going overboard. Much of the info has been duplicates of the ROTC and JROTC articles. Much of the info consists in lists of name of staff, unit commanders, etc that doesn't seem to pass WP:SCH#WNTI. A few extra eyeballs and opinion would probably help. North Valleys High School and Fontainebleau High School are the most problematic, also there have been issues with Deer Valley High School (Glendale, Arizona) and Air Academy High School. Thanks. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 00:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Drive by tagging

Just a heads up, AnteaterZot (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) is drive-by tagging school articles for prod and merge. You might want to keep your eyes out on any school articles. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 17:41, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Most of the articles tagged recently by AnteaterZot seem to deserve the tag. -- roundhouse0 (talk) 18:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I do try and frequently check PROD tags added by AnteaterZot and others, I do often find they are added to illegible articles, such as ones previously discussed at AFD. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 19:03, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I may have applied a prod tag to an article that was already discussed at AfD, or was previously prodded. I always check the history for such, but sometimes it doesn't appear in the history. According to Misplaced Pages:Deletion policy#Proposed deletion if a Prod tag has been removed, it cannot be reapplied. However, if an article has been deleted by an admin after a prod and recreated, I think it can be prodded again. When you say "often," how many examples or erroneous tags have you found? AnteaterZot (talk) 03:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

if you go a little slower, they will be fewer. Every mistake made causes work for other people and possible drama. And I do not like merge tags that read "to the appropriate article for the locality" Find or create the article, then suggest the merge. DGG (talk) 03:58, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I was unaware that the tag allowed the insertion of a merge target. I'll be happy to insert it. AnteaterZot (talk) 04:16, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

It would be great if you could do that. And also if you could start putting comments on the talk pages for PRODs and suggested merges. It lets people know what your specific concerns are so that they can try to improve the article, or your reasoning since they may well agree with you. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 05:28, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I will not do that for Prods, my reasons are enshrined right in the tag. As for the merger tag, putting some boilerplate text in the talk page saying "this school article is on a non-notable school, and the salvageable part of article is a two-sentence listing of the school's name, district, address and/or principal" will duplicate what the tag itself says. The vast majority of the articles are created by well-meaning people who don't know Misplaced Pages policy. My goal is to educate them. I've tagged about 408 schools for merger. How many of those tags were inappropriate? AnteaterZot (talk) 05:47, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

If your goal is to educate users that you already realize aren't familiar with policy, you'll probably get much further by spelling it out for them on the talk page in a helpful manner, rather than assuming they'll understand the tag. And when you do a prod, do you first check for possible available references? Or do you just see none on the article and tag it? Re the "how many were inappropriate" the problem is you've tagged so many it will take a significant amount of time. You should already know if they were appropriate, if you're unsure you shouldn't tag them. I noticed this today because I removed an inappropriate tag. I just now did a spot check on a random article A google news search for the same gets over 150 hits. I would hope that you'd already done this work before tagging. It's possible that this school IS notable. The talk page would have been a great place to bring it up, or better yet, actually work on improving articles that you're tagging. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 05:53, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

(ec) Prior to bringing an article to AfD, one is supposed to check if online sources are available. However, the Prod tag says, "It is proposed that this article be deleted because of the following concern:

Bla bla bla

If you can address this concern by improving, copyediting, sourcing, renaming or merging the page, please edit this page and do so. You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to its deletion for any reason. To avoid confusion, it helps to explain why you object to the deletion, either in the edit summary or on the talk page. If this template is removed, it should not be replaced."

Thus it seems to me that you are attempting to impose a new policy on me. I am within my rights to propose the deletion of articles that simply appear to be on non-notable topics. If you want me to stop Prod tagging articles, I suggest you get the policy on Proposed Deletion changed. AnteaterZot (talk) 06:02, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

The policy at WP:PROD says "Tailor your reason to each individual article; generic messages are not helpful" and also "it is considered courteous to notify the article's creator and other significant contributors that you have proposed an article for deletion". The problem with the mass proposals of such tags is that it clearly doesn't allow enough time for the editors to deal with all the things you've flagged. In addition, without having explanation other than the generic one which lists a variety of reasons rather than something specific, the editors don't have guidelines on what to do to improve. Again, we have to realize here than many new and inexperienced editors are working on school articles. Let's try to help them rather than tag/merge/prod the articles out of existence. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 06:53, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Please point out an actual example of a prod tag where my reason for proposing deletion was inappropriate. AnteaterZot (talk) 16:26, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Here's two quick ones - they're the first two I checked in fact, and both were in error. is a blue ribbon school and where due diligence was not done - google news search show hundreds of articles alone, including from the NY times. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 18:03, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, so perhaps a blue ribbon school should not have been Prodded. However, the article was extremely short, and did not provide references. Even if the Prod had not been caught, the article could have been recreated easily. As for the due diligence, that article had no claims to notability, and could also have been recreated as it was very short. You are wrong to even suggest that I have to do due diligence when I Prod. As an admin, you should know better. I refuse to do it. AnteaterZot (talk) 18:12, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

As for Arden Middle School, I proposed a merger, not deletion. Part of the reason I am doing this tagging is to get editors who are not currently members of WP:SCHOOLS involved in the editing of their articles. You, TerriersFan, and a couple of others who try to patch up school articles are not enough. When high schools are nominated for deletion, have I not stepped in, found sources, and in some cases saved an article? AnteaterZot (talk) 06:30, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

The point is 1) Leave an explanation when putting a merger or prod tag and 2) If there aren't enough people fixing articles, why not put your efforts there? I don't think that drive-by tagging articles is encouraging anyone and it's gone on long enough. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 06:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

• No, I have said all that needs to be said about that. Take a look at my contribs. Several editors have come forward to work on their articles. How do my merge tags harm anybody? There is no time limit on them, and people can remove them, and have. The articles I have prod tagged richly deserved it. If they get deleted, nothing stops their recreation. How does it my tagging harm you? How is disruptive? AnteaterZot (talk) 07:39, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • It's disruptive because there are so many of us who have to clean up after you spam nearly 500 pages with ill-considered and unreasoned tags which i doubt you ever check back in on you are doing nothing to help anyone. The harm is easily found in the animosity you generate and in the number of new contributors you frighten off. For every article you are "helping" you are sending ten other notable schools down the drain. Have a look at WP:BITE, we need to support new editors no matter how bad their initial contributions are Adam McCormick (talk) 08:09, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Ill considered? The Project made that tag, for a reason. A merge tag is dirty? I frighten people off? I'm sending an article down the drain? These schools are notable? Please provide proof for these inflammatory statements. AnteaterZot (talk) 08:17, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
      • I have no problem with recommending merges for appropriate articles but what seems to have happened in this case is that merge tags were added wholesale without the articles even being read. The nominator seems to have assumed that every single primary/elementary school should be merged regardless of the content and the sources. I've removed the merge tag from a number of quite legitimate articles which should never have been tagged in the first place. Dahliarose (talk) 11:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
        • Really? I looked at your contribs, it seems that you removed one merge tag, Westende Junior School. Did I count wrong? AnteaterZot (talk) 16:20, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I look at it as that PRODing is not supposed to be a big deal; PROD tags can be removed easily and even if an article is deleted via PROD it can be undeleted/re-created without discussion. I do appreciate if people provide a reasonably detailed reason on why they PROD/de-PROD an article, and in reply to the question of how many illegible PRODs have a found, when doing a scan through a list of currently PROded articles, I usually find at least one that is illegibly PRODed and/or should very likely be kept. I will continue to remove PRODs for articles which have been re-created after been deleted via WP:PROD. My reason is: WP:PROD does not list in detail every situation when PROD should/should not be used, so it is important that the spirit of it is looked at instead. If a person re-creates an article deleted via PROD it almost certainly means that they disagree with its deletion - note that when re-creating an article the software tells you that it was previously deleted and the concern given in the PROD is by default the reason given. The policy says WP:PROD is for uncontroversial deletions (so it should be clear that no one disagrees with it) and it says an article can be proposed for deletion, though once only - if an article is re-created on the same topic, and even has the same content, I don't see why it should not be considered a second time. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 16:41, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

• Project-Class school pages
• NA-importance school pages